Third party votes change laws

 

LPeagle

 

Every election year Republican Svengalis come hunting Libertarian Trilbys to convert to the Immutable Platform cast in stone  by God’s Own Prohibitionists. This is  what happened in 1887. The episode is reported in the words of John Sherman, Congressman, Senator, Secretary of both State and Treasury and brother to Civil War General William Tecumseh Sherman. Eventually, it is the Major Party platform that changes because integrity wins out over equivocation.  People willing to kill you to take your money are also willing to lie–the easier to to rob you with, my voter!

transitional“The only danger he (Governor Foraker) encountered was in the active movement of the Prohibition party. This party ran a separate ticket, the votes of which, it was feared, would mainly come from the Republican party. In a speech I made at Oberlin, on the 4th of November, I made an appeal to our Prohibition friends to support the Republican ticket. I said: “There are but two great parties in this country, one or the other of which is to be put in power. You have a perfect right to vote for the smaller Prohibition party, and thus throw away your vote, but you know very well that either a Republican or a Democratic legislature will be elected, and that there will not be a single Prohibition candidate elected. Will it not be better to choose between these two parties and give your assistance to the one that has done the most for the success of your principles?”

Observe that the prohibitionists wanted the laws to change. They did not care a whit about which politician is grinning from the podium. Yet Sherman immediately offered them a false choice between a grinning Republican and a supposedly wasted vote. Sherman then dangled the real bait. 

“We think the Republican party is still entitled, as in the past, to your hearty support. Among other of its enactments there is the ‘Dow law,’ looked upon you with suspicion, yet it has done more for temperance than your ‘prohibition laws’ at present could have done. That law enables you to exclude the sale of liquor in more than 400 Ohio towns. It was passed by a Republican legislature. By it more than 3,000 saloons have been driven out of existence. “Then you have the repeated declaration of the Republican party, a party that never deceived the people with false promises, that they will do anything else that is necessary, or all that is possible by law, to check the evils that flow from intoxicating drinks.” (It took the GOP another thirty years to completely wreck the economy through prohibition enforcement in 1930. That drove plenty of people out of business, and did it again in 2007.)

“Is there not a choice between that party and the Democratic party, which has always been the slave of the liquor party, and whose opposition to the enforcement of the Dow law cost the state $2,000,000? The Democratic party, if put in power, will repeal that law and will do nothing for prohibition that you will accept.” (To frighten fanatics, threaten them with the horrors of freedom!)

“They say they want license, but they know it can never be brought about without a change in the constitution. They want the liquor traffic to go unrestrained. It does seem to me that with all the intelligence of this community it is the duty of all its candid men, who are watching the tendencies of these two parties in this country, not to throw their votes away.” (Again, the Republican platform contained what the prohibition voters did not want, yet proffer it as a future possiblity, and point to the Hobgoblin as the only alternative to surrendering their integrity.)

“It is much better to do our work by degrees, working slowly in the right direction, than to attempt to do it prematurely by wholesale, and fail. More men have been broken up by attempting too much than by ‘going slow.'” (Softlee, softlee, catchee monkey–old Chinese proverb)

“Your powerful moral influence, if kept within the Republican party, will do more good, a thousandfold, than you can do losing your vote by casting it for a ticket that cannot be elected. Next year will present one of the most interesting spectacles in our history. The Republican party will gather its hosts of progressive and patriotic citizens into one grand party at its national convention, and I trust that when that good time comes our Prohibition friends and neighbors who stand aloof from us will come back and join the old fold and rally around the old flag of our country, the stars and stripes, and help us to march on to a grand and glorious victory.”
(Sherman 1895 p. 770–of the single-volume edition) 

The prohibitionists of course did not fall for it, but other voters reelected the candidate–who was defeated the subsequent year. Prohibitionists cast their votes for what they really wanted–a change in the laws. To the Republican, his ticket meant his party’s hand in the till. The Prohibition Party did not want a hand in the till. They wanted men with guns to take to the streets and arrest people for beer and liquor. The Major Party seduction relies on the fallacy of equivocation to trick the voters into betraying their own values and sacrificing them instead to what the Major Party wants. By preferring their own misguided lust for the power to coerce others, the prohibitionists injected next to the Bill of Rights an amendment transforming the Constitution into a religious fetish for the initiation of deadly force against peaceful individuals.

 

What’s going on in Brazil?

dilminha73Brazil’s two most recent presidents have been anti-American populists of the looter persuasion, both of them chummy with the Bolivian, Cuban and Venezuelan governments. Two things stand out about these three governments. All were targets of massive United States intervention, and none of the three have anything resembling a Libertarian party. In fact, Lula and Dilma’s Workers Party is probably the most honest and (ignoring economic freedom) Libertarian party in the country. Brazil has 32 government-subsidized  political parties and voting is mandatory. All of the parties are communist, socialist or prohibitionist–-if not all of the above, and the people best situated to be able to tell the difference, Brazil’s voters themselves, have elected and reelected Lula and Dilma twice. They were practically national heroes until 2013, when something happened.

The North American colonies were of great strategic importance to England, and quickly mastered the arts of shipbuilding and weapons production. Portugal’s colonies, on the other hand, we’re deliberately kept backward and impoverished by regulation and predatory taxation. Docile Citizen is not a bad description of your average forced-to-vote voter, and Brazilian politics are pretty low key. Mussolini is greatly admired here, and whatever the Vatican utters quickly becomes law.

Right now, for instance, there is an epidemic of mosquito-borne disease that causes women to deliver pinhead babies. When the news broke, religious physicians spoke as one in first denying the reports, then casting aspersions, and finally removing nearly all mention of the public health hazard lest Brazilian women rise up and demand the right to legally terminate pregnancies. None of the 32 parties seeks to legalize abortion, and the illegal practice remains a lucrative source of tax-free cash revenue. Local telescreens likewise avoid all mention of legalization or decriminalization of hemp in Colorado, Washington, Canada, Australia or Portugal. Yet, oddly enough, two of the most loud-mouthed prohibitionist politicians–Maluf and Cunha–have just been politically neutralized by criminal charges/investigations.

bushaecioDilma’s opponent in the last election, a CIA-backed prohibitionist zealot whose name is associated with helicopters full of dope and landing strips–has also fallen glumly silent after incessant squawking since the day he lost. The whole situation reeks of superpower meddling. The Bush Dynasty régimes’ asset-forfeiture orgy destroyed the Brazilian economy–already disrupted before by similar Bush-Reagan policies of 1987-1992.  Bradley Manning’s disclosures revealed the the US was busily exporting asset-forfeiture prohibitionism throughout the world at a time when the United States economy was collapsing–possibly in hopes of shorting the suckers to recoup its losses when their economies predictably collapsed. Furthermore, it is common knowledge that the Workers’ Party is not fanatically bent on shooting youngsters over victimless nonsense like the erstwhile US-backed military junta with its death squads. Edward Snowden’s revelations of NSA spying on boodling politicians’ and magnates’ cellphones raises the question of whether recorded conversations and email intercepts might have been conveniently passed along to local authorities and opposition parties in furtherance of destabilizing indictments.

At this time it is hard to tell what is going on. All appearances indicate that some sort of Taeping Rebellion of Fifth Column infiltrators with a foreign agenda is once more afoot. I clearly remember the US intervention in 1964. That coercive meddling has done more to popularize Communism (and National Socialism) in the Southern Hemisphere than anything else. Now–with no nuclear-tipped communist empire on the map–would be an excellent time for the Republicans and Democrats to leave South America well enough alone.